Web Standards Project Blasts IE
Monday April 10th, 2000
Luke writes, "The Web Standards Project posted a press release pointing out (and frowning upon) Internet Explorer 5.5's poor standards support. IE still does not fully support CSS1 or HTML 4, and has very poor support for DOM level 1 compared to Mozilla, which is currently very close to full support with only minor bugs left."
You can read more about this at XMLHack, and you can also read MS's position on standards here.
#1 MS's position on standards
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 3:26 PM
Hmm. Sounded to me like "for the Internet," they value compatibility with older versions of IE over compliance with standards.
"For the Intranet," it's more important that they release innovative and new features that their customers (read: businesses) want than fixing bugs (read: failure to comply with standards they helped create).
I think we're screwed so far as WinIE's compliance with standards goes. :b
#2 Who are you kidding??
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 3:49 PM
IE5.5 has no support for core XML, but when is the last time you put CDATASections, ProcessingInstructions or EntityReferences into you HTML??
On the other hand, IE5's W3C *HTML* DOM is 100% working.(and usefull!) From my own experience with Milestone 10 to 14, Netscape6 beta1 and M15 nightlies, the known DOM1 and event bugs in Mozilla are growing by the hundreds every month. As for DOM2, most DOM2 methods only have empty "placeholders".
Just one example: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30461
Moving over an HTML element inside (for instance) a table cell triggers an mouseout for the table cell. Constructing HTML using basic DOM1 that works flawlessly in IE5 is a nightmare in Mozilla...missing cells, missing rows, dissapearing elements, "missing" attributes. Stuff that only works in a certain order, et cetera...
I agree that IE5.5 doesn't make much progress to compliance and a "compliant" web platform.
On the other hand, most Mozilla/Netscape programmers have a completely reversed view, towards compliance that is *really* unusable and incomplete: XML
In Mozilla M15:
-I can't load XML in ECMAScript.(GET)
-I can't save XML in ECMAScript.(POST)
-I can't persist XML.(XML cookies)
-I can't get the serialized XML.
-I actually can't use the parser in any way ;-)
IE5 can do all those things. This allows me to hook up Windows clients to (mostly) non-Microsoft servers.(Debian and FreeBSD). Mozilla, in comparison, is like an editor without "Load", "Save" or "Print", because "there aren't standards for those yet".
If Navigator 1.x hadn't introduced cookies, we'd still be passing state in URLs.(Yuck!)
Standards complaince is good.
Not going into uncharted territory because the maps aren't ready is wrong. I want to build kick-ass webapps NOW. I want those apps to work in Mozilla. Being able to load, save, (client)persist and edit XML in any possible way is *essential*.
I keep hearing about all the great XML and Core DOM1 support in Mozilla. Well, it's time you do something usefull with it! Gimme XML! ;-)
#3 Re: Who are you kidding??
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 4:45 PM
> Mozilla, in comparison, is like an > editor without "Load", "Save" or > "Print"
Mozilla is not the tool for teh content provider, but for the user. The user *can* load/save/print a document in Mozilla, the content provider should not be able to do that IMO.
> Not going into uncharted territory > because the maps aren't ready is wrong
That attitute is exactly the reason for the imcompatibilities we have today. If the standards are not sufficient, you should enhance them /together with the other vendors/.
#4 Re: Who are you kidding??
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 5:20 PM
> Mozilla is not the tool for teh content provider, but for the user. The user *can* load/save/print a document in Mozilla, the content provider should not be able to do that IMO.
I wrote " *like* an editor without .. ".
You could also say that "XML support in Mozilla is like a browser without an address bar, back button or stop button"
>That attitute is exactly the reason for the imcompatibilities we have today. If the standards are not sufficient, you should enhance them /together with the other vendors/.
Wrong. Standards follow practice.
Nice fact for you: A W3C standard only becomes that when there are at least two different independant implementations. Standards are build on experience, on feedback, on getting your hands dirty with some technology.
The mess we have now is mostly (css & css positioning) because Nescape chose not to implement standards in Nav 4.5.
IE's pace of CSS implementation has me disappointed as well. On the other hand, IE5's HTML DOM is (to my experience) flawless.
The W3C DOM documents *explicitly state* that the implementor has to add meaningfull methods for loading/saving/serializing. Sun's XML parser is 100% compliant, but it also has methods for loading/saving/additional functionality.
I mean, what's the use of a parser if you can't load or save data?
#6 Re: Who are you kidding??
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 5:28 PM
"IE5.5 has no support for core XML, but when is the last time you put CDATASections, ProcessingInstructions or EntityReferences into you HTML?? "
I don't put them in HMTL. I do however use all of the in XML. CDATA is very important in my book as well as entity refs. They can be extremely useful.
#8 Core XML works just fine in the *parser*
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 5:44 PM
IE5+ doesn't support XML as a replacement for HTML. Most people have no problem with this, because:
They build the User Interface in HTML and access XML using the scriptable parser, which supports XML Core just fine.
#5 agreed - sort of
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 5:27 PM
I definitely agree with you that standards support is not sufficient for building apps that work. Standards are great, but often you need to do stuff that isn't standard yet. That's why I completely support MS and Moz implementing proprietary stuff...
However, if a standard is out there, support it first, for crissakes! That's IE's downfall. Mozilla, on the other hand, isn't implementing any proprietary stuff in the web browser. Instead, they're inventing a ton of proprietary stuff for XPFE that may one day be a standard - and that's all cool since they're implementing the standards too.
The XML issues you speak of are valid. However, I beg to differ that they are not possible to do in Mozilla.
A). You can load and save XML data with ECMAScript using a hidden IFRAME. I know because I use that very technique today in Mozilla.
B). If you want to serialize XML with ECMAScript, it's not that hard. It would probably take less than 100 lines of ECMAScript to implement an XML DOM serializer.
C). And you could persist that a string of XML in a cookie easily.
D). If you want to parse XML, it's quite easy. Use the "createContextualFragment" technique that people have discussed for mimicing IE's .innerHTML property.
#7 Usefull reply
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 5:39 PM
I didn't think of (D), but the other 3 solutions you mentioned is also what I use.
They do have some problems:
A) is not dynamic (apart from being an ugly - but for now usefull - hack). I can't get it to work "on demand"
B) Will only work with very simple XML.
C) Any recordset of moderate size (say 25k) is much too big for a cookie.
I'll read up on (D) in the docs. Thanks! =)
#9 goes for win ie only..
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 6:59 PM
but did you read the "a list apart" article on ie5 for the mac? they really love that one (and for its standards support).. and don't try read that article with moz because the links (to the next page) still don't work upon first click (and the author's home page at www.zeldman.com looks like s*#& with moz).. it may only be "minor bugs" but moz/nc6 doesn't work perfectly yet and there are still quite a few details e.g. even in html4 which are still not implemented.. i think the sectarianism should stop and the standards be supported because, after all: what are all the proprietary techniques good for when i always have to take into consideration that "the other half" will not get to see the results.. (suggested reading: "the dao of the web", also at www.alistapart.com)
#11 Re: goes for win ie only..
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 11:30 PM
yes but most people use windows. my main worry still remains-that MS wants to shut out all non-windows platforms-even Macs running IE. On the other hand, I've always supported Netscape because even though it had proprietary stuff it was always multi-platform and always promoted that idea.
#10 Mozilla & Standards
Tuesday April 11th, 2000 7:17 PM
Okay, IE5.5 didn't look too good in beta, but will Mozilla look any better?
What is the status for HTML 4, DOM 1 and CSS 1 (bugs included) for Moz?
I'm not doubting that Moz can deliver, but it really would be nice to see some indicator of how much of these standards does Moz really support currently.
Wednesday April 12th, 2000 12:23 AM
#13 Re: Opera
Wednesday April 12th, 2000 11:19 AM
for CSS there is the RichInStyle tests...